Can too many ultrasounds be dangerous?:(

[JennTheMomma]

My OB and my Midwife don't believe they are safe. I have read in books on ultrasounds and I don't believe they are safe. Yes, they are good to help diagnose problems, and should only be used for that purpose. I had 2 u/s with my first son, and only 1 with this baby. I will not have any more unless I need them (which I highly doubt). Research doesnt' say they are safe, they say there isn't enough evidence to deem them unsafe, which does not automatically make them safe. Many researchers are researching this right now and are finding out that it's not all that safe. The sounds waves they use are at a very high frequency. With the u/s I had a few weeks ago, my baby was squirming around and putting his hands over his ears, it was sad to see My DH agrees with me, and he has to use soundwaves in his career sometimes, he knows it can be dangerous. I would never do a 3D or 4D scan, and would never get one privatly done at a place where they aren't Doctors.

 

[Missy86]

can you have then done privatly at places that are not doctors?

 

[jackie.d]

My OB and my Midwife don't believe they are safe. I have read in books on ultrasounds and I don't believe they are safe. Yes, they are good to help diagnose problems, and should only be used for that purpose. I had 2 u/s with my first son, and only 1 with this baby. I will not have any more unless I need them (which I highly doubt). Research doesnt' say they are safe, they say there isn't enough evidence to deem them unsafe, which does not automatically make them safe. Many researchers are researching this right now and are finding out that it's not all that safe. The sounds waves they use are at a very high frequency. With the u/s I had a few weeks ago, my baby was squirming around and putting his hands over his ears, it was sad to see My DH agrees with me, and he has to use soundwaves in his career sometimes, he knows it can be dangerous. I would never do a 3D or 4D scan, and would never get one privatly done at a place where they aren't Doctors.

why would we be advised they are safe from our doctors and midwives when we ask if theyr not then, surely they can not lie to us?
iv never been told 'i dont know' or 'we dont know either way' iv been told yes they are safe
i have had loads of scans

 

[BabyJayne]

jackie.d - don't worry hun. I can't say what Jennthe momma meant, but I meant that they are deemed safe, and are vital for many people medically. The only point I was making is that going the extra hog and having the full 3d/4d profile, is not something I want to do as my midwife friend has recommended against it.

If I am told I need extra scans I will have them without hesitation. I just won't go peering inside for no medical reason. Again, simply my opinion.

You are perfectly fine hun x

 

[Junebug_CJ]

I am a medical geneticist trained in teratology and prenatal diagnosis, i.e. in the study of what is dangerous and not dangerous to babies. Ultrasounds are considered safe in pregnancy, unlike radiation (i.e. CT scans) and X-rays. There are NO studies that have shown an increased incident of poor fetal outcome, fetal demise, premature labour, congenital anomalies, etc... in pregnancies exposed to ultrasounds. I reassure all my patients on this topic. I think one has to be careful about the source of information, there is a lot of misinformation on the internet!

So to reassure all you ladies with multiple scans for medical reasons: there is NO NEED TO WORRY!
CJ

 

[TigerLady]

All evidence thus far shows they are highly likely to be safe. That doesn't mean it is IMPOSSIBLE for this to be found to be wrong at a later date -- however, it is highly unlikely that will happen.

Studies that have shown it to be "unsafe" are often ones in which extremely high doses of soundwaves were bombarded at rat fetuses for extended periods. That sometimes led to abnormal cell division. I highly doubt anyone's doctor is using excessively high doses for hours and hours day after day on our babies.

This is similar to studies that have found some artificial sweetners can cause cancer -- yeah... if you eat your BODY weight in it every day for ages!

Like anything else -- moderation is best. Don't go having 3 dozen scans that last for several hours each. That would just be silly. But extra scans that are done by medical professionals are believed to be completely safe.

As for the sound waves hurting a fetus (i.e. it covering its ears), I am sorry if you don't agree, but this was coincidence. Human ears are not designed to hear those high frequencies. Our babies cannot hear those frequencies any more than we can. Fetuses can't hear anything until 20 weeks -- then they START to hear certain things (all muffled by the water and tissue of mom). Even my 5 month old doesn't cover his ears at a scary sound as he doesn't understand yet HOW he hears that sound. Let alone a 20 week fetus understanding that. I just don't think that is possible.

Please don't let anyone scare you if you have had multiple scans!!

What about Safety?
It has been over 40 years since ultrasound was first used on pregnant women. Unlike X-rays, ionizing irradiation is not present and embryotoxic effects associated with such irradiation should not be relevant. The use of high intensity ultrasound is associated with the effects of "cavitation" and "heating" which can be present with prolonged insonation in laboratory situations.
Although certain harmful effects in cells are observed in a laboratory setting, abnormalities in embryos and offsprings of animals and humans have not been unequivocally demonstrated in the large amount of studies that have so far appeared in the medical literature purporting to the use of diagnostic ultrasound in the clinical setting. Apparent ill-effects such as low birthweight, speech and hearing problems, brain damage and non-right-handedness reported in small studies have not been confirmed or substantiated in larger studies from Europe. The complexity of some of the studies have made the observations difficult to interpret. Every now and then ill effects of ultrasound on the fetus appears as a news item in papers and magazines. Continuous vigilance is necessary particularly in areas of concern such as the use of pulsed Doppler in the first trimester.

The greatest risks arising from the use of ultrasound are the possible over- and under- diagnosis brought about by inadequately trained staff, often working in relative isolation and using poor equipment.

A discussion on the various possible effects of ultrasound on the human fetus can be found here. Ultrasound scans should best be performed when there is a clear indication to do so. When there is, safety considerations should not be an issue to prevent its prudent use.

 

[aliss]

I am a medical geneticist trained in teratology and prenatal diagnosis, i.e. in the study of what is dangerous and not dangerous to babies. Ultrasounds are considered safe in pregnancy, unlike radiation (i.e. CT scans) and X-rays. There are NO studies that have shown an increased incident of poor fetal outcome, fetal demise, premature labour, congenital anomalies, etc... in pregnancies exposed to ultrasounds. I reassure all my patients on this topic. I think one has to be careful about the source of information, there is a lot of misinformation on the internet!

So to reassure all you ladies with multiple scans for medical reasons: there is NO NEED TO WORRY!
CJ

Absolutely. I think people need to understand the difference between internet information and actual peer-reviewed journal information. There is a huge difference - anyone can say ANYTHING they want on the internet, it is absurd how much questionable information exists on the internet. Even websites with "professional" sounding domain names can be hardly scientific. Go to the actual sources of research - go to a library and ask the librarian to show you how to research! And THAT has nothing to do with my opinion on the subject of ultrasounds - it is just the reality of how badly informed people can be from the internet.

 

[honeygrl]

I had 10 scans done when I was pregnant with my daughter. She had no problems at all! My old doctor did a scan at every single visit with all his patients to check on the baby.

 

[kate.m.]

Wow- i was wondering this exact same question today! I have already had 2 ultrasounds (dating & nuchal) and... did one myself today!!!! I work at a vets, so i used the ultrasound we have there (only for a few minutes- incase any1 came in!)- it was very exciting to see baby jumping about again! Was just gonna come home and do some research to see how often is too often, because its gonna be sooo tempting to do it all the time now. But, i know im gonna have to limit myself!

 

[daisyfflur]

On the Lancet website there is research into ultrascans and the size of the baby. In basic terms they say their is a possible link to having a smaller baby but by the time the baby is 12 months old they will have caught up in size. Both my boyfriends mum and my mum (a pediatric nurse of some 20 odd years) told me about this but I still chose to have private scans etc.

 

[TigerLady]

That didn't prove true for my LO -- we had at least a dozen scans... he was born at 8 lbs 14 oz a week early (by section as he was breech)...

He's 5 months old now, wears clothes for 2 year olds and weighs about 23 lbs! He's ABOVE the 100th centile on the growth charts (which I didn't even know was possible).

Like anything else, you have to make your own decision. Things only get more controversial from here -- after LO arrives you have decisions to make about BFing, FFing, early or late weaning, purees or BLW, disposables or cloth, co-sleeping or own cot, daycare or SAHM, baby signing or not -- EVERYthing can be controversial.

Make the best decsion you can with your own knowledge and research, then don't feel bad for that decision later!

 

[Missy86]

That didn't prove true for my LO -- we had at least a dozen scans... he was born at 8 lbs 14 oz a week early (by section as he was breech)...

He's 5 months old now, wears clothes for 2 year olds and weighs about 23 lbs! He's ABOVE the 100th centile on the growth charts (which I didn't even know was possible).

Like anything else, you have to make your own decision. Things only get more controversial from here -- after LO arrives you have decisions to make about BFing, FFing, early or late weaning, purees or BLW, disposables or cloth, co-sleeping or own cot, daycare or SAHM, baby signing or not -- EVERYthing can be controversial.

Make the best decsion you can with your own knowledge and research, then don't feel bad for that decision later!

O crap thats alot to think about

 

[TigerLady]

^^ Tell me about it! It seems a never ending line of "what do do next" and what is best????? With loads of "evidence" and opinions that can be found to support every side of every issue.

 

[daisyfflur]

That didn't prove true for my LO -- we had at least a dozen scans... he was born at 8 lbs 14 oz a week early (by section as he was breech)...

Like I said, a possible link...

 

[Midlands_moth]

I am a medical geneticist trained in teratology and prenatal diagnosis, i.e. in the study of what is dangerous and not dangerous to babies. Ultrasounds are considered safe in pregnancy, unlike radiation (i.e. CT scans) and X-rays. There are NO studies that have shown an increased incident of poor fetal outcome, fetal demise, premature labour, congenital anomalies, etc... in pregnancies exposed to ultrasounds. I reassure all my patients on this topic. I think one has to be careful about the source of information, there is a lot of misinformation on the internet!

So to reassure all you ladies with multiple scans for medical reasons: there is NO NEED TO WORRY!
CJ

Thanks for that post.

The majority of us here are not medical professionals and are only listening to theories spread by people who have no real knowledge of ultrasound or medical physics.

For the midwives who recomend against ultrasound like my one did i asked her what training she did in medical imaging and physics and she said none.

I think its a load of nonsense that 4D scans harm babies, its our own ignorance we believe it.

A doctor friend told me that when he was training they were scanning ladies for 1 hour non stop at a time and no harmwas done.

i be more worried about vaccinations than about ultrasound scans

 

[Pyrrhic]

That didn't prove true for my LO -- we had at least a dozen scans... he was born at 8 lbs 14 oz a week early (by section as he was breech)...

Like I said, a possible link...

Possible being the key word.

Lots of things are possible, with no foundation.

 

[sandrass]

Im sorry if I caused any sort of fight here!

I think I feel confident enough to continue with my 2 other scans now.

 

[Rmar]

I am a medical geneticist trained in teratology and prenatal diagnosis, i.e. in the study of what is dangerous and not dangerous to babies. Ultrasounds are considered safe in pregnancy, unlike radiation (i.e. CT scans) and X-rays. There are NO studies that have shown an increased incident of poor fetal outcome, fetal demise, premature labour, congenital anomalies, etc... in pregnancies exposed to ultrasounds. I reassure all my patients on this topic. I think one has to be careful about the source of information, there is a lot of misinformation on the internet!

So to reassure all you ladies with multiple scans for medical reasons: there is NO NEED TO WORRY!
CJ

Absolutely. I think people need to understand the difference between internet information and actual peer-reviewed journal information. There is a huge difference - anyone can say ANYTHING they want on the internet, it is absurd how much questionable information exists on the internet. Even websites with "professional" sounding domain names can be hardly scientific. Go to the actual sources of research - go to a library and ask the librarian to show you how to research! And THAT has nothing to do with my opinion on the subject of ultrasounds - it is just the reality of how badly informed people can be from the internet.

Oh yes, do as much research as you can. As for me, I have done over 50 hours of research on ultrasounds alone and I have made my choice. If anyone else goes to do their own research and spends time in depth looking into ultrasounds and makes the opposite decision to me, I can't complain about that because they are just as informed.

When doing research, think about who the person is who are giving you information and what they have to gain from it. I find it hard to listen to advice from someone who will gain money from me making a decision to do what they say. It doesn't mean they aren't right, it just means I don't know the exact reason for them saying this. But when I hear an opinion from someone who could be making money from saying something but doesn't, it pricks my ears a little.

 

[Midlands_moth]

Hi Ladies

The fewer times baby is subjected to ultrasound the better, as although it is thought to be safe, it cannot be proved completely. She also told me that at any one time in the hosp she works at, which is my local one, between 70 and 80 per cent of babies in the special care unit are from mothers have had 3d/4d scans. She said it could be coincidence but she would recommend scans only on medical advice and necessity.

A load of nonsense, considering the popularity of 4D scans it very probable that the majority of expecting women will have had one and just because 80 per cent of babies in the special care unit are from mothers have had 3d/4d scans does not mean that the 4D scan or an ultrasound scan caused it, if she knew a bit about 4D scans she would know that the 4D scans are computer generated and uses the same power intensity as 2D scans.

one thing is true there are plenty of private ultrasound clinics owned by non medical people and that frightens me

 

[Midlands_moth]

I am a medical geneticist trained in teratology and prenatal diagnosis, i.e. in the study of what is dangerous and not dangerous to babies. Ultrasounds are considered safe in pregnancy, unlike radiation (i.e. CT scans) and X-rays. There are NO studies that have shown an increased incident of poor fetal outcome, fetal demise, premature labour, congenital anomalies, etc... in pregnancies exposed to ultrasounds. I reassure all my patients on this topic. I think one has to be careful about the source of information, there is a lot of misinformation on the internet!

So to reassure all you ladies with multiple scans for medical reasons: there is NO NEED TO WORRY!
CJ

Absolutely. I think people need to understand the difference between internet information and actual peer-reviewed journal information. There is a huge difference - anyone can say ANYTHING they want on the internet, it is absurd how much questionable information exists on the internet. Even websites with "professional" sounding domain names can be hardly scientific. Go to the actual sources of research - go to a library and ask the librarian to show you how to research! And THAT has nothing to do with my opinion on the subject of ultrasounds - it is just the reality of how badly informed people can be from the internet.

Oh yes, do as much research as you can. As for me, I have done over 50 hours of research on ultrasounds alone and I have made my choice. If anyone else goes to do their own research and spends time in depth looking into ultrasounds and makes the opposite decision to me, I can't complain about that because they are just as informed.

When doing research, think about who the person is who are giving you information and what they have to gain from it. I find it hard to listen to advice from someone who will gain money from me making a decision to do what they say. It doesn't mean they aren't right, it just means I don't know the exact reason for them saying this. But when I hear an opinion from someone who could be making money from saying something but doesn't, it pricks my ears a little.

you would be suprised the amount of people who quote procedures and techniques in the medical papers and do the opposite in their clinical practise

all doctors and medical personnel make money from illness and pregnancy